Judge Sonia Sotomayor is the Supreme Court Nominee

by Pythiian1 | May 26, 2009 at 06:15 am

1974 views | 94 Recommendations | 44 comments

Breaking News: President Obama has chosen federal Judge Sonia Sotomayor from New York, as his nominee for the United States Supreme Court on Tuesday, May 26.

President Barack Obama called Judge Sonia Sotomayor at 9 PM on Memorial Day to say she was his pick for the Supreme Court.

President Obama has used a propitious opportunity to burnish his legacy with this historic nomination.

The Supreme Court Justice is a uniquely lifetime appointment conferred by the United States Constitution to insure the independence of the Supreme Court from Presidential and Congressional influences. Once the confirmation is made, the President no longer has the power to remove the Justices. Congress can try to impeach a Justice through a complicated and long process. The last time such impeachment attempt was made in 1804 and it failed.

Ms. Sotomayor is the first Latina and third female U.S. Supreme Court justice, if she is confirmed. Judge Sotomayor has more diverse experience than any other previous Supreme Court nominees at the time of their nominations.

Judge Sotomayor has a compelling personal story for having grown up in the housing project in the South Bronx, New York. She grew up in the housing project along Bruckner Expressway, along Rosedale Avenue, and a train ride to the Yankee Stadium, both old and new.

Ms. Sotomayor attended and graduated from Princeton and Yale law school on scholarships. In her acceptance speech, Ms. Sotomayor pointed out her background in working as a corporate lawyer, prosecutor, private practice lawyer, and judge.

She said, "I am humbled by President Obama's decision to nominate me to the highest court of the nation." Ms. Sotomayor credited her mother, Celina Sotomayor, a single parent for raising her brother, Juan Sotomayor, a physician, and her by working at two jobs.

Sotomayor, a 54-year-old judge on the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, was named a U.S. District Court judge by President George H.W. Bush in 1992, and was elevated to her current seat by President Clinton.

The conservative community has already criticized Judge Sotomayor for some of her more controversial statements and the recent decision on the firefighters in Connecticut.

"Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important that the law as written," said Wendy Long, counsel to the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network.

"She thinks that judges should dictate policy and that one's sex, race and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench. ... She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court."

Her supporters said that she is a moderate and has been previously nominated by President George H. W. Bush, which would give her some bipartisan backing in the Senate. She is a known moderate and well respected by both Republicans and Democrats who work with her in the state of New York.

From the Manhattan District Attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau:

President Obama has made an outstanding choice in selecting Judge Sonia Sotomayor to serve on the United States Supreme Court.

From the New York State Attorney General, Andrew M. Cuomo:

Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s journey from the Bronx to Supreme Court nominee is a true New York success story. She is a distinguished and thoughtful voice whose years of judicial expertise will be pivotal as the Supreme Court tackles historic issues vital to all Americans. Just as Justices Marshall and O’Connor broke down centuries-old barriers, Judge Sotomayor is a trailblazer whose accomplishments will serve as an inspiration for women, minorities and all New Yorkers.

According to her previous law clerk, Judge Sotomayor is personable and accessible although she is also has high expectations of her clerks.

Robyn Kar, who clerked for Sotomayor from 1998 to 1999, described her as a "warm, extraordinarily kind and caring person."

"She has an amazing story, but she's also just an amazing person," he said, adding that she has a knack for getting to know those around her. "She was the judge who, in the courthouse for example, knew all of the doormen, knew the cafeteria workers, who knew the janitors -- she didn't just know all of the other judges and the politicians. She really went out of her way to get to know everyone and was well loved by everyone."

It was Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) who submitted her name to President Obama for consideration.

More to follow as the story develops.

2 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend This comment thread is now closed

Pythiian1

at 13:15 on May 26th, 2009

For starter, roy c., I've always thanked those who recommended my pieces via PM as I've done so with you in the previous piece and this piece. Those who recommended and posted their comments receive their comments would invariably receive acknowledgement, as you must recall that I had, in the past, thanked you as well.

Thank you for your input, however, a personal attack on me does little to generate any discussion. You are free to post your own article to debate the topic.

I don't, however, respond to drive-by-shooting-comments from either side of the political spectrum as evident in my previous piece when someone blatantly attacked Americans driven by ideological belief on the opposite side of some commentators who had expressed their comments in my current piece.

If you and others read the entire piece, you would have noticed that the article presented both sides of the political spectrum. It is the news as it occurred, whether or not, you and anyone likes it.

Amy Judd

at 12:02 on May 26th, 2009

This is a personal comment, you're right. An author has the right to reply or not reply to any comment they want; it's their piece.

I realize you're trying to bring up the concept of reporting objectively, but please don't bait the author by pointing out what you see as being a personal fault within them.

Karen Hatter

at 13:26 on May 26th, 2009

Thank you for your comments, Amy. Perceived, personal assessments, assessments offered that attempt to indicate perceptions and hinted at actions not expressly stated by a contributor in their story or their thread, is a form of personal attack.

Pythiian1

at 11:56 on May 27th, 2009

As the article clearly stated, Latina, which is female designation. Judge Sotomayor is the first Latina Supreme Court nominee. Thanks.

Karen Hatter

at 18:33 on May 27th, 2009

The excerpt from a speech delivered by Judge Sotomayor in October 2001quoted above :

"“wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences,” including appreciation for Latin-American cuisine, “would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

- is quoted out of context and refers to comments made by former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

A link to the full text of Judge Sotomayor's remarks can be found here.

Excerpted from the same speech:

Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring to the extent of my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.

Pythiian1

at 13:45 on May 26th, 2009

Thanks, Amy, for your comments and observations about baiting the author, although I've also addressed the thank you issues in that I responded to each via PM when I am on site as I work and go to school.

Patricia Turo

at 19:05 on May 26th, 2009

Diversity in the Supreme Court can only be a good thing. I don't think anyone makes decisions without bringing in experiences that shape their lives and thinking. She will bring that to the Court like no one else has ever done. Considering the diversity in the US and the lack thereof in the Supreme Court up to now, this is a choice that will bring a new approach in interpreting the law that effects EVERYONE. Her experience and background is impressive. Where she will stand on the issues we will have to wait and see, but I like that what she draws on is more like the average American citizen and not just a clinical take on the law.

As for some of the comments above, they should be handled in PM's. Comments should be about the article.

Pythiian1

at 19:25 on May 26th, 2009

Thank you for your recommendation and sharing your observations about the Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor's compelling background, not to mention her distinguish years as a federal judge.

albertacowpoke

at 07:24 on May 26th, 2009

Biography of Sotomayor:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonia_Sotomayor

CBC Newsworld reported on Judge Sotomayor and mentioned her experience as a prosecutor, trial lawyer and the Federal Court. Their assessment is that Republicans are already calling her the most liberal activist judge. Republicans face a dilemna in opposing her. First the Democrats have a majority in both the House and Senate. In addition she is the first Latina appointed to the Highest Court in the land. Latinos have the largest swing vote in the country. They believe that she has a 99.9% of getting confirmed.

René

at 11:02 on May 26th, 2009

No, sorry, wrong link. Here's about the 1st .

Karen Hatter

at 13:31 on May 26th, 2009

Drive by shooting comments are most annoying.

albertacowpoke

at 13:45 on May 26th, 2009

Here is the point of view on this debate from North of the Border. If you look at my previous comment above, you will see that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation reported this story similar to what was presented by the author of this story.

Ms Sotomayor is taunted by the White House as a judge that is better qualified than any other judge at the time of their nomination to the Supreme Court. That is a given or she wouldn't have been nominated. Obviously she is supported by the Democrats.

On the other hand, the Republicans will be critical, which is also to be expected. This is no different than it was during the nomination of Judge Roberts.

Politics is a dirty game and there are many dividing issues. As an example where does Ms Sotomayor stand on abortion, same sex marriage and many other social issues.

In some ways, I'm happy that most of these issues have been resolved in this country and as a result they have been taken off the front page.

Personally I like a lively debate with opposing views. No two people will always agree on everything, but they can be civil about it and respect each other's views.

An old wise man once said. You can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please them all - all of the time.

So let's kiss and make up :)

Pythiian1

at 08:29 on May 26th, 2009

Thanks so much, Paschen, for your recommendation and comment.

She has worked with Republicans and Democrats in the state of New York throughout her years in federal court system. She was a tough prosecutor in the Southern District of Manhattan, New York.

Pythiian1

at 08:48 on May 26th, 2009

Thanks so much, Spydermonkey, for your recommendation and comment.

As I mentioned earlier, it is expected that some fights would occur between Republicans and Democracts during the Senate Confirmation hearing. It is how Judge Sotomayor responds to the Senators' questions will be an important consideration.

Roy C

at 09:50 on May 26th, 2009

Geez, Pythian, don't you think it rings a little hollow to always thank those that agree with you but not offer the same gratitude to those who read and comment but disagree with you?

I know this is a personal comment, but your constant "thank you" reserved for favorites is a personal comment as well when it is reserved for agreement as if disagreement were not the greater force, the greater value of Free Speech.

It's not exactly illuminating that Sottamayor has been overturned a record 80-something times and was rebuked by a Latino judge over her last decision, which apparently had no reference to the constitution at all.

Reporting as objectively as we can get means allowing the good, the bad, the beautiful and the ugly admission.

How would leaving out those facts not be a liberal version of Fox News a la Pythian?

Roy C

at 10:51 on May 26th, 2009

There is a case where she has been rebuked recently. I am trying to find it.

In the meantime, she has been overturned on every decision of hers that has made it to SCOTUS, and by 8-0 decision and 6-3, 7-2, not just the predictable 5-4 of the lib-conservative split, meaning that the liberal justices have voted against her as well.

Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

1. Affirmative Action: Ricci v. DeStefano 530 F.3d 87 (2008) - decision pending

2. Wrong on the environment: Riverkeeper, Inc. vs. EPA, 475 F.3d 83 (2007) - reversed 6-3

3. Wrong on taxes: Knight vs. Commissioner, 467 F.3d 149 (2006) - upheld but unanimously rejected the reasoning she adopted

4. Wrong on finance: Dabit vs. Merrill Lynch, 395 F.3d 25 (2005) - reversed

6-3

5. Wrong on Health Insurance: Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. vs. McVeigh, 396 F.3d 136 (2005) - reversed 5-4

6. Wrong on Civil Rights: Malesko v. Correctional Services Corp., 299 F.3d 374 (2000) - reversed 5-4

7. Wrong on Intellectual Property: Tasini vs. New York Times, et al, 972 F. Supp. 804 (1997) - reversed 7-2

8. Affirmative Action: Ricci v. DeStefano 530 F.3d 87 (2008) - decision pending

9. Wrong on the environment: Riverkeeper, Inc. vs. EPA, 475 F.3d 83 (2007) - reversed 6-3

10. Wrong on taxes: Knight vs. Commissioner, 467 F.3d 149 (2006) - upheld but unanimously rejected the reasoning she adopted

11. Wrong on finance: Dabit vs. Merrill Lynch, 395 F.3d 25 (2005) - reversed 8-0

12. Wrong on Health Insurance: Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. vs. McVeigh, 396 F.3d 136 (2005) - reversed 5-4

Wrong on Civil Rights: Malesko v. Correctional Services Corp., 299 F.3d 374 (2000) - reversed 5-4

13. Wrong on Intellectual Property: Tasini vs. New York Times, et al, 972 F. Supp. 804 (1997) - reversed 7-2

Reading through the story, it seems that if a test doesn't produce the desired result, it is in and of itself discriminatory.

April 10, 2009 Justices to Hear White Firefighters’ Bias Claims By ADAM LIPTAK
NEW HAVEN — Frank Ricci has been a firefighter here for 11 years, and he would do just about anything to advance to lieutenant.

The last time the city offered a promotional exam, he said in a sworn statement, he gave up a second job and studied up to 13 hours a day. Mr. Ricci, who is dyslexic, paid an acquaintance more than $1,000 to read textbooks onto audiotapes. He made flashcards, took practice tests, worked with a study group and participated in mock interviews.

Mr. Ricci did well, he said, coming in sixth among the 77 candidates who took the exam. But the city threw out the test, because none of the 19 African-American firefighters who took it qualified for promotion. That decision prompted Mr. Ricci and 17 other white firefighters, including one Hispanic, to sue the city, alleging racial discrimination.

Their case, which will be argued before the Supreme Court on April 22, is the Roberts court’s first major confrontation with claims of racial discrimination in employment and will require the justices to choose between conflicting conceptions of the government’s role in ensuring fair treatment regardless of race.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has repeatedly noted his hostility to what he has called the “sordid business” of “divvying us up by race.” In 2007, diverging from an important Rehnquist court decision that allowed public universities to consider race in admissions decisions, the Roberts court forbade public school systems to take race explicitly into account to achieve or maintain integration.

“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.

But those cases involved education, and it has been decades since the court last took an intensive look at the use of race in public hiring or promotion. Among the questions swirling around Mr. Ricci’s case are whether the law should treat diversity in the work force differently from diversity in the classroom and how it should handle hiring and promotion tests that have a severely disparate impact on candidates of one race.

The city says it was merely trying to comply with a federal law that views job requirements like promotional tests with great suspicion when they disproportionately disfavor minority applicants.

“The fact of the matter is it’s a flawed test,” said Victor A. Bolden, the city’s acting corporation counsel.

Karen Hatter

at 06:59 on May 28th, 2009

I wrote:

A link to the full text of Judge Sotomayor's remarks can be found here .

The linked article contains a link to the entire speech.

Pythiian1

at 07:58 on May 26th, 2009

Thanks so much, Jarrett, for your comment and recommendation. It is a fairly safe nomination given Judge Sotomayor's moderate stance, although I expect there will be some fights during the Senate confirmation hearings.

Nauman Umair Khan

at 08:03 on May 26th, 2009

Truly breaking, thanks a lot for sharing.

Paschen

at 08:23 on May 26th, 2009

She is Puerto Rican-American. She does have an interesting carer resume.

Spydermonkey

at 08:26 on May 26th, 2009

Good & timely information :)

But for some reason, I get the feeling that when they get to discussing her nomination in the Senate there will be the typical brouhaha over silly stuff....

I hope I'm wrong.... but my 2cents worth anyway

René

at 10:42 on May 26th, 2009

1st Latin-American, not exactly.

Roy C

at 12:46 on May 26th, 2009

Well, Amy, how we treat others helps us constitute a community. Trying to deliberately make someone who disagrees feel unwanted personally is to go against the formation of community.

Cypresso, for example, always thanked people who agreed and disagreed.

In any case, Amy, since thanking and not thanking has nothing inherent to do with the story itself, then the person who chooses to thank and not to thank, has made the forum a personal one.

And, in that case, having opened the door for personal comments, other personal comments follow.

We can say that this is splitting hairs, but I would say that this was an attempt to eliminate manipulation and stay with the ongoing pursuit of the truth.

Roy C

at 13:24 on May 26th, 2009

Yes, I am free, very free and I have called it as I see it. Yes, again, it is nice to receive a perfunctory thank you for recommending the piece, but the spirit of debate calls for inclusion, not exclusion, and we all know that tone of voice and the way we respond can attract or alienate posters.

Pythiian1

at 18:02 on May 26th, 2009

Thanks so much, Rhonda, for your recommendation and added information regarding the other candidates. Like I wrote earlier, the article was written as the news occurred when the President made his announcement.

Pythiian1

at 11:47 on May 27th, 2009

Thank you so much, Duo, for your recommendation and comments.

As my article mentioned, the Supreme Court Justice is a lifetime position that is conferred by constitutional design to grant the Justices independence from Presidential and Congressional influences.

Each Justice has a choice to work as long as he or she wishes, and based on past and recent examples, some have chosen retirement such Justices Thurgood Marshall, Byron White, Harry Blackmun, Sandra Day O'Connor, and David Souter, to name a few.

integrityforamerica

at 21:02 on May 27th, 2009

Some how I am not focused on her race, I am not even focused on where she comes from, but i think what is most important is her history on the bench and what she stands for as a judge. We have to at some point set aside politics and start rebuilding this country, I for one and so against focusing on the little issues like race and gender, I am so concerned with big issues like policies, beliefs, integrity and honesty. Black, white or spanish, male or female doesnt matter. Integrity is what matters most.

www.integrityforamerica.org (thats my new organization)

integrityforamerica.blogspot.com

www.twitter.com/integritynews

Jarrett Martineau

at 07:22 on May 26th, 2009

Thanks for this.

Pythiian1

at 08:26 on May 26th, 2009

Thanks so much, Nauman Umair, for your recommendation, comment, and interest in the US Supreme Court.

Ravinwood_777

at 09:05 on May 26th, 2009

Nothing Chairman Obama does surprises me these days. All I can say is, "what did you people expect" somebody with a little credibility instead of a fancy résumé and law degree? Now were one step closer to becoming nothing!!!

America's fallen and cannot get up